Jean‐Baptiste Woillard

Introduction Tacrolimus is an immunosuppressant largely used in heart transplantation. However, the calculation of its exposure based on the area under the curve (AUC) requires the use of a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model. The aims of this work were (i) to develop a population PK model for tacrolimus in heart transplant patients, (ii) to derive a maximum a posteriori Bayesian estimator (MAP‐BE) based on a limited sampling strategy (LSS) and (iii) to estimate probabilities of target attainment (PTAs) for AUC and trough concentration (C0). Material and Methods Forty‐seven PK profiles (546 concentrations) of 18 heart transplant patients of the Pharmacocinétique des Immunosuppresseurs chez les patients GREffés Cardiaques study receiving tacrolimus (Prograf®) were included. The database was split into a development (80%) and a validation (20%) set. PK parameters were estimated in MONOLIX® and based on this model a Bayesian estimator using an LSS was built. Simulations were performed to calculate the PTA for AUC and C0. Results The best model to describe the tacrolimus PK was a two‐compartment model with a transit absorption and a linear elimination. Only the CYP3A5 covariate was kept in the final model. The derived MAP‐BE based on the LSS (0‐1‐2 h postdose) yielded an AUC bias ± SD = 2.7 ± 10.2% and an imprecision of 9.9% in comparison to the reference AUC calculated using the trapezoidal rule. PTAs based on AUC or C0 allowed new recommendations to be proposed for starting doses (0.11 mg·kg −1 ·12 h −1 for the CYP3A5 nonexpressor and 0.22 mg·kg 1 ·12 h −1 for the CYP3A5 expressor). Conclusion The MAP‐BE developed should facilitate estimation of tacrolimus AUC in heart transplant patients.

In combination with Bayesian estimates based on a population pharmacokinetic model, limited sampling strategies (LSS) may reduce the number of samples required for individual pharmacokinetic parameter estimations. Such strategies reduce the burden when assessing the area under the concentration versus time curves (AUC) in therapeutic drug monitoring. However, it is not uncommon for the actual sample time to deviate from the optimal one. In this work, we evaluate the robustness of parameter estimations to such deviations in an LSS. A previously developed 4-point LSS for estimation of serum iohexol clearance (i.e., dose/AUC) was used to exemplify the effect of sample time deviations. Two parallel strategies were used: (a) shifting the exact sampling time by an empirical amount of time for each of the four individual sample points, and (b) introducing a random error across all sample points. The investigated iohexol LSS appeared robust to deviations from optimal sample times, both across individual and multiple sample points. The proportion of individuals with a relative error greater than 15% (P15) was 5.3% in the reference run with optimally timed sampling, which increased to a maximum of 8.3% following the introduction of random error in sample time across all four time points. We propose to apply the present method for the validation of LSS developed for clinical use.